Neal C. Patel

Fecal Microbiota Transplant for Recurrent Clostridium difficile Infection: Mayo Clinic in Arizona Experience

OBJECTIVE To report the initial experience of treating recurrent Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) with fecal microbiota transplant (FMT) at Mayo Clinic in Arizona. PATIENTS AND METHODS The study retrospectively reviewed FMTs performed at Mayo Clinic in Arizona between January 1, 2011, and January 31, 2013. All the recipients had multiple recurrent CDIs unresponsive to traditional antibiotic drug therapy. A standardized protocol was developed to identify patients, screen donors, perform FMT, and determine outcomes via telephone surveys. RESULTS Thirty-one patients (mean ± SD age, 61.26±19.34 years) underwent FMT. Median time from index infection to FMT was 340 days. Ninety-seven percent (29 of 30) of patients reported substantial improvement or resolution of diarrhea (median time to improvement, 3 days), 74% (17 of 23) reported improvement or resolution of abdominal pain (median time to improvement, 3 days), and 55% (16 of 29) had improvement or resolution of fatigue (median time to improvement, 6 days). Three patients underwent repeated FMT owing to persistent symptoms; 2 reported improvement in diarrhea with the second therapy. No serious adverse events directly related to FMT were reported. CONCLUSION A standardized regimen of FMT for recurrent CDI is safe, is highly effective, and can be provided using a relatively simple protocol.

Nonneoplastic polypectomy during screening colonoscopy: the impact on polyp detection rate, adenoma detection rate, and overall cost.

BACKGROUND The frequency of nonneoplastic polypectomy (NNP) and its impact on the polyp detection rate (PDR) is unknown. The correlation between NNP and adenoma detection rate (ADR) and its impact on the cost of colonoscopy has not been investigated. OBJECTIVE To determine the rate of NNP in screening colonoscopy, the impact of NNP on the PDR, and the correlation of NNP with ADR. The increased cost of NNP during screening colonoscopy also was calculated. DESIGN We reviewed all screening colonoscopies. PDR and ADR were calculated. We then calculated a nonneoplastic polyp detection rate (patients with ≥1 nonneoplastic polyp). SETTING Tertiary-care referral center. PATIENTS Patients who underwent screening colonoscopies from 2010 to 2011. INTERVENTIONS Colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS ADR, PDR, NNP rate. RESULTS A total of 1797 colonoscopies were reviewed. Mean (±standard deviation) PDR was 47.7%±12.0%, and mean ADR was 27.3%±6.9%. The overall NNP rate was 10.4%±7.1%, with a range of 2.4% to 28.4%. Among all polypectomies (n=2061), 276 were for nonneoplastic polyps (13.4%). Endoscopists with a higher rate of nonneoplastic polyp detection were more likely to detect an adenoma (odds ratio 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-1.2). With one outlier excluded, there was a strong correlation between ADR and NNP (r=0.825; P<.001). The increased cost of removal of nonneoplastic polyps was

Association of Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasm (IPMN) With Extra-Pancreatic Cystic Lesions: Is there a Systemic Cystic Disorder?

32,963. LIMITATIONS Retrospective study. CONCLUSION There is a strong correlation between adenoma detection and nonneoplastic polyp detection. The etiology is unclear, but nonneoplastic polyp detection rate may inflate the PDR for some endoscopists. NNP also adds an increased cost. Increasing the awareness of endoscopic appearances through advanced imaging techniques of normal versus neoplastic tissue may be an area to improve cost containment in screening colonoscopy.

Changes in efficiency and resource utilization after increasing experience with double balloon enteroscopy

Association of Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasm (IPMN) With Extra-Pancreatic Cystic Lesions: Is there a Systemic Cystic Disorder?

Lack of an association between autoimmune pancreatitis and Varicella Zoster Virus.

AIM To investigate changes in efficiency and resource utilization as a single endoscopists experience increased with each subsequent 100 double balloon enteroscopy (DBE) procedures. METHODS We reviewed consecutive DBE procedures performed by a single endoscopist at our center over 4 years. DBE was employed when the clinician deemed the procedure was needed for disease management. The approach (oral, anal or both) was chosen based on suspected location of the target lesion. All DBE was performed in a standard endoscopy room with a portable fluoroscopy unit. Fluoroscopy was used to aid in shortening the small intestine and reducing bowel loops. For oral DBE, measurements were taken from the incisors. For anal DBE, measurements were taken from the anal verge. Enteroscopy continued until the target lesion was reached, until the entire small intestine was examined, or until no further progress was deemed possible. The length of small intestine examined (cm), procedure duration (min), and fluoroscopy time (s) were analyzed for sequential groups of 100 DBE. Sub-groups of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures were analyzed using multivariable linear regression. RESULTS 802 consecutive DBE procedures were analyzed. For oral DBE, median [interquartile range (IQR)] length of small bowel examined was 230.8 cm (range: 210-248 cm) and for anal DBE was 143.5 cm (range: 100-180 cm). No significant increase in length examined was noted for either the oral or anal approach with advancing position in series. In terms of duration of procedure, the median (IQR) for oral DBE was 86 min (range: 71-105 min) and for anal DBE was 81.3 min (range: 67-105 min). When comparing by the position in series, there was a significant (P value < 0.001) decrease in procedure duration for both upper and lower procedures with increasing experience. Median (IQR) time of exposure to fluoroscopy for oral DBE was 190 s (114-275) compared to anal DBE which was 196.4 s (312-128). This represented a significant (P value < 0.001) decrease in the amount of fluoroscopy used with increasing position in series. For both oral and anal DBE, fluoroscopy time was reduced by greater than 50% over the course of 802 total procedures performed. Sub-group analysis was conducted on therapeutic and diagnostic groups. Out of 802 procedures, a total of 434 were considered therapeutic. Argon plasma coagulation was by far the most common therapeutic intervention performed. There was no evidence of a difference in length examined or fluoroscopy exposure among oral DBE for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, P = 0.91 and P = 0.32 respectively. The median (IQR) for length was 235 cm (range: 178-280 cm) for diagnostic vs 230 cm (range: 180-275 cm) for therapeutic procedures; additionally, fluoroscopy time median (IQR) was 180 s (range: 110-295 s) and 162 s (range: 102-263 s) for no intervention and intervention. However, there was a significant difference in procedure duration among oral DBE (P < 0.001). The median (IQR) was 80 min (range: 60-97 min) and 94 min (range: 77-110 min) for diagnostic and therapeutic interventions respectively. CONCLUSION For a single endoscopist, increased DBE experience with number of performed procedures is associated with increased efficiency and decreased resource utilization.

A Comparison of Patient Satisfaction With Sedation Between Fentanyl/Midazolam and Meperidine/Midazolam in Patients Undergoing Endoscopy

Autoimmune pancreatitis is a form of chronic pancreatitis that was first described by Sarles et al. in 1961, and later coined in 1995 by Yoshida et al. [1, 2]. Subsequently, two types of autoimmune pancreatitis have been described. Autoimmune pancreatitis type 1 fits the classic description of the disease and is associated with a lymphoplasmacytic sclerosing pancreatitis and an elevated level of immunoglobulin G4 subclass of IgG. Autoimmune pancreatitis type 2 is characterized by a distinct neutrophilic obliterating lesion of the ductal epithelium [3]. Although the histopathological findings of autoimmune pancreatitis are well studied, the risk factors, pathogenesis, and treatments are still not well understood. There have been many hypotheses to the etiology of autoimmune pancreatitis, which are still being studied. One proposed theory is that of microbial mimicry leading to an autoimmune disorder. Several studies have been conducted to evaluate for a link with autoimmune pancreatitis and infectious causes, such as Helicobacter Pylori, without identifying a clear relationship [4]. Additionally, there has been a reported link between viral infections and acute pancreatitis, such as Coxackievirus [5]. Beginning several months ago, some of the physicians of our Department of Gastroenterology noticed a general pattern of newly diagnosed autoimmune pancreatitis with recent shingles outbreak or Zoster vaccine administration. To further study the possible association, we conducted a pilot study to examine the incidence of autoimmune pancreatitis with concomitant Varicella Zoster Virus. We identified four patients from the Mayo Clinic Medical Data Trust who had undergone core biopsy or surgical resection of the pancreas and had been diagnosed with autoimmune pancreatitis. All cases of autoimmune pancreatitis were associated with an elevated (more than 1.5 x upper reference limit) IgG4 level as well as histologic changes consistent with the diagnosis. With these four cases of autoimmune pancreatitis identified, we identified two cases for controls with normal pancreatic tissue. Both of these groups of tissue samples had already been collected and were accessed from the Mayo Medical Laboratory. Once the six tissue samples were obtained, we conducted in-situ hybridization assays for Varicella Zoster Virus. We used this technique because it enables localization of the viral DNA in the tissues if present. Finally, we calculated the incidence of Varicella Zoster Virus antibodies in normal pancreatic tissue and in autoimmune pancreatitis tissue samples. Out of the four cases of confirmed autoimmune pancreatitis, zero tissue samples showed evidence of concomitant Varicella

Measurement of polypectomy rate by using administrative claims data with validation against the adenoma detection rate

A Comparison of Patient Satisfaction With Sedation Between Fentanyl/Midazolam and Meperidine/Midazolam in Patients Undergoing Endoscopy